As if we didn't know that allready... Here are some excerpts from the proposal being sent around to the delegates in Durban. The bottom section is the relevent one. They feel the First World should give them 1.6 TRILLION dollars PER YEAR to aid the UN in this endeavor.

This the same UN that aided and abetted the Rwandan massacre, that saw the oil for food program enrich UN leaders while Iraqi's died of starvation. Yeah right.

Annex I Parties should take the lead, taking into account their historical
responsibilities pursuant to such a paradigm on equitable access to sustainable
development, including through adoption at the seventeenth session of the Conference of
the Parties and rapid and time-bound implementation thereafter of ambitious, robust and
comparable short-, mid- and long-term Annex-I quantifies emission limitation and
reduction objectives;

(c) Equity, common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capabilities, and sustainable development (equitable access to sustainable development
which will ensure adequate time for social and economic development for all developing
countries; low-carbon development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development);

Social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and
overriding priorities of developing country Parties, the extent of developing country
Parties&#8217; contributions to global emissions reductions shall be consistent with the principles
and provisions of the Convention, as appropriate to their specific needs and circumstances
and dependent on the extent to which finance, technology and capacity-building support by
developed country Parties. The extent of adaptation support to developing countries is
contingent on developed country mitigation ambition and provision of support for
mitigation in developing countries as required under the Convention and reaffirmed in the
Bali Action Plan, to enable developing countries to achieve sustainable development;

Equity
34. Decides that a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050,
referred to in decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 5, shall be achieved by Parties on the basis ofequity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and
respective capabilities. Accordingly, equity shall be reflected by having a fair sharing and
an equitable allocation framework wherein developed country Parties take the lead in
undertaking deep binding emission reductions in the short-, mid- and long-terms that reflect
their historical and current responsibility for global emissions and in providing finance,
technology and capacity-building to developing countries, consistent with their
commitments under the Convention.

and by providing
finance, technology and capacity building to developing countries in order to assist them in
undertaking relevant actions to adapt to and mitigate climate change, while assuring
developing countries the right to sustainable development and elimination of poverty.

72. Migrants &#8211; ensuring the full respect of human rights, including the inherent rights of
migrants

Rights of mother earth
74. Ensure respect for the intrinsic laws of nature;
75. The recognition and defence of the rights of Mother Earth to ensure harmony
between humanity and nature, and that their will be no commodification of the functions of
nature, therefore no carbon market will be developed with that purpose;
76. The assurance that in all actions related to forest land, the integrity and
multifunctionality of the ecological systems shall be preserved and no offsetting or market
mechanisms shall be applied or developed.
Right to survive
77. The rights of some Parties to survive are threatened by the adverse impacts of
climate change, including sea level rise.

The provision of the amount of funds to be made available annually to developing
country Parties, which shall be equivalent to the budget that developed countries spend on
defence, security, and warfare. Fifty per cent of that amount shall be for adaptation, 20 per
cent for mitigation, 15 per cent for technology development and transfer and 15 per cent for
forest-related actions in developing country Parties;

You'd have us believe there aren't money motivations on the other side?!?! Tell me then, what's your objection? Isn't it that you simply have other priorities? I don't see the skeptics living in grass huts, either.

You'd have us believe there aren't money motivations on the other side?!?! Tell me then, what's your objection? Isn't it that you simply have other priorities? I don't see the skeptics living in grass huts, either.

Click to expand...

Both the mugger and his victim have a "money motivation." The mugger wants to take money from his victim and the victim wants to keep his money.

You'd have us believe there aren't money motivations on the other side?!?! Tell me then, what's your objection? Isn't it that you simply have other priorities? I don't see the skeptics living in grass huts, either.

Click to expand...

Both the mugger and his victim have a "money motivation." The mugger wants to take money from his victim and the victim wants to keep his money.

According to you, both are equally morally culpable.

That's a perfect example of liberal "morals."

Click to expand...

Then quit mugging people. Lack of education is no excuse. Just because you don't understand AGW theory, doesn't mean you have the right to shit on the rest of us.

It's an extortion scheme on a grand scale. Some UN study group came out with a theory that "women in undeveloped mountainous countries suffer disproportionately from man-made global warming". Let your imagination be your guide. Maybe the cocaine harvest is bigger and women have to carry heavier loads of the stuff when the mules break down.

You'd have us believe there aren't money motivations on the other side?!?! Tell me then, what's your objection? Isn't it that you simply have other priorities? I don't see the skeptics living in grass huts, either.

Click to expand...

Show me where the other side is getting anywhere close to 1.6 trillion to pass out to their buddies from the First World taxpayers buckwheat.

You'd have us believe there aren't money motivations on the other side?!?! Tell me then, what's your objection? Isn't it that you simply have other priorities? I don't see the skeptics living in grass huts, either.

Click to expand...

Both the mugger and his victim have a "money motivation." The mugger wants to take money from his victim and the victim wants to keep his money.

According to you, both are equally morally culpable.

That's a perfect example of liberal "morals."

Click to expand...

Then quit mugging people. Lack of education is no excuse. Just because you don't understand AGW theory, doesn't mean you have the right to shit on the rest of us.

Click to expand...

Yes AGW theory is so difficult only a moron can understand it. Any theory that is non falsifiable is by definition pseudo science. But then you'd have to actually be intelligent and ethical to understand that simple concept.

You'd have us believe there aren't money motivations on the other side?!?! Tell me then, what's your objection? Isn't it that you simply have other priorities? I don't see the skeptics living in grass huts, either.

Click to expand...

My first objection, shooting from the hip, is Carbon Credits. Talk to me in a few years when the schemes and scams kick in and you can't afford your utilities.

OK, people, you have won. We will see the effects of unlimited GHG emissions. We are already experiancing the consequences. But you have won, the experiment is made, and we will see where the tipping points were. Past tense, because we have no idea where they are until the inevitable effect are wreaking havoc on society. But that's OK. That is what you wished for, that is what you get.

OK, people, you have won. We will see the effects of unlimited GHG emissions. We are already experiancing the consequences. But you have won, the experiment is made, and we will see where the tipping points were. Past tense, because we have no idea where they are until the inevitable effect are wreaking havoc on society. But that's OK. That is what you wished for, that is what you get.

Click to expand...

Nobody has "won" yet. We are making an impact far beyond what you gave us credit for, that is for sure. Considering we're just a bunch of "deniar, cult, retards" in the words of one of your more unhinged clones, we are certainly kicking your pathetic asses around.

Or maybe, just maybe, the "settled science" really isn't. Maybe, hopefully, scientific integrity will rear its ugly head and the climateologists will return to scientific research instead of political punditry.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!